Rep. Fleming: Obama Is Undermining National Security "On Purpose"

April 08, 2010 3:40 pm ET —
Walid Zafar

Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) has a record of selectively quoting
or leaving out important information when discussing an issue. So it should come as no surprise that he's
chosen to oppose a policy without acknowledging the historical context that
would undermine his claim and render his point moot.

In a piece published by the Daily
Caller, Fleming, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, criticizes
the administration's efforts towards nuclear disarmament and accuses the
president of appeasement, writing that if other countries threaten the United
States, our policy under Obama is to apologize to them. The piece is dishonest and nonsensical,
primarily because Fleming compares Obama's purported weakness to Ronald
Reagan's bravery by not mentioned the fact that Reagan was, in the words of Fred Kaplan, a "nuclear abolitionist." Fleming writes, "President Reagan understood
all too well what this president and other liberals like him chose to ignore:
strength equals deterrence equals peace."

As our partner organization, Media Matters
for America, has highlighted, Reagan was very much in favor of nuclear
disarmament.

Reagan's "ultimate goal" was "eliminating all
nuclear weapons." Inseveralspeeches,
Reagan stated that his "ultimate goal" was the "total
elimination of nuclear weapons."

Reagan: "[S]igning of the first-ever agreement eliminating
nuclear weapons" "has a universal significance for mankind." In
December 1987, President Reagan signed
the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with the Soviet Union, which
"requires destruction of the Parties' ground-launched ballistic and cruise
missiles with ranges of between 500 and 5,500 kilometers, their launchers and
associated support structures and support equipment within three years after
the Treaty enters into force."

[...]

Reagan proposed reductions to ICBMs that eventually became the
START I treaty. In a May 9, 1982 speech, Reagan stated:

The main threat to peace posed by nuclear weapons today is the growing
instability of the nuclear balance. This is due to the increasingly destructive
potential of the massive Soviet buildup in its ballistic missile force.

Therefore, our goal is to enhance deterrence and achieve stability
through significant reductions in the most destabilizing nuclear systems,
ballistic missiles, and especially the giant intercontinental ballistic
missiles, while maintaining a nuclear capability sufficient to deter conflict,
to underwrite our national security, and to meet our commitment to allies and
friends.

Fleming writes, "Our nuclear arsenal has provided
this strong and much needed deterrent to other nuclear countries." He forgets
to mention, of course, that while the Obama's administration seeks to rid the
world of all nuclear weapons, no such thing is currently being proposed. We will still have thousands
of nuclear weapons in our arsenal. He
goes on to state that Obama's action "significantly undermines not only our
national security, but the security of our partners and allies as well - many
of whom have chosen not to develop and deploy WMDs of their own solely based on
the credibility of the U.S. extended nuclear deterrent" without again acknowledging
that the fact that little will
change in our actual national security apparatus.

But one part of his piece stands out as particularly disgusting. Towards the end of his piece, Fleming, echoing conservative radio
personality Rush Limbaugh, writes, "Simply put, President Obama is
disadvantaging the United
States one step at a time and undermining
this country's national defense on purpose." The
emphasis is his.